Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/5185

Bill Overview

Title: Strengthening Coastal Communities Act of 2022

Description: This bill expands and revises the system of vulnerable coastal areas that are protected under the Coastal Barrier Resources Act, including by directing the Department of the Interior to carry out a coastal hazard pilot project to identify areas that can be added to the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System. The bill also modifies certain boundaries of the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System Units located in Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Virginia.

Sponsors: Sen. Carper, Thomas R. [D-DE]

Target Audience

Population: People living in or dependent on vulnerable coastal areas worldwide.

Estimated Size: 130000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Hotel Manager (Miami, Florida)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think the policy could help protect our coastlines, which is vital for tourism.
  • We often worry about hurricanes and sea-level rise, so anything that bolsters our defenses is welcome.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 7 3

Marine Biologist (Wilmington, Delaware)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is a critical step in the right direction for environmental protection.
  • Our work often shows the precarious state of coastal biodiversity, so I'm hopeful for positive changes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 9 6
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 10 3
Year 20 9 2

Property Developer (Charleston, South Carolina)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might restrict some developments, which isn't ideal for business.
  • However, protecting certain areas could raise property values elsewhere.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 5 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Environmental Activist (New York, New York)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Strengthening protections for vulnerable areas is crucial.
  • I hope this acts as a catalyst for further environmental policies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 5

Retired Teacher (Newport, Rhode Island)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm glad they're doing something to protect our beautiful coastlines.
  • Maintaining natural barriers is crucial for the future.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 7 3

Transportation Worker (Baltimore, Maryland)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Hoping this will support our infrastructures and job security.
  • Coastal development impacts my job directly because of port activities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 4

Fisherman (Gloucester, Massachusetts)

Age: 68 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Any protection of marine resources benefits my livelihood.
  • Saltmarsh and barrier protections are essential for the ecosystem.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 7 4
Year 3 8 4
Year 5 9 3
Year 10 8 2
Year 20 8 2

Tech Entrepreneur (Virginia Beach, Virginia)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policy seems good but doesn't affect my business much.
  • I enjoy living close to nature, so sure, it's good if they protect it.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Tourist Guide (Cape May, New Jersey)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could boost tourism, which would be great!
  • Responsible stewardship of coastal areas is crucial for continued business.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 7 3

Local Artist (Hilton Head, South Carolina)

Age: 61 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Anything preserving our natural surroundings keeps me inspired and happy.
  • The policy’s potential impact on the environment gives me hope.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 9 6
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 4

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)

Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)

Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)

Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations